Closed
Bug 1390253
Opened 7 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
Change stub installer's 64-bit minimum memory requirement from >= 1800 MB to > 2048 MB
Categories
(Firefox :: Installer, enhancement)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
Firefox 57
People
(Reporter: cpeterson, Assigned: molly)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
59 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
robert.strong.bugs
:
review+
gchang
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details |
Based on the telemetry analysis from our Firefox 54 Funnelcake experiment, we've decided that we should increase 64-bit Firefox's minimum memory requirement from 1800 MB to strictly greater than 2048 MB. Note that users with exactly 2048 MB should now receive 32-bit Firefox, not 64-bit! In practice, this means 64-bit Firefox's minimum memory requirement will be 3 GB because few users have fractional GB sizes between 2-3 GB. Currently: * users with < 1800 MB receive 32-bit Firefox and * users with >= 1800 MB receive 64-bit Firefox. We'd like to change that so: * users with <= 2048 MB receive 32-bit and * users with > 2048 MB receive 64-bit.
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•7 years ago
|
||
mozreview-review |
Comment on attachment 8897119 [details] Bug 1390253 - Increase RAM threshold for automatic 64-bit installation. https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/168408/#review173672 ::: browser/installer/windows/nsis/stub.nsi:190 (Diff revision 1) > ; Blurb duty cycle > !define BlurbDisplayMS 19500 > !define BlurbBlankMS 500 > > -; Amount of physical memory required for the 64-bit build to be selected. > +; Amount of physical memory required for the 64-bit build to be selected (2 GB). > ; Machines with less RAM than this get the 32-bit build, even with a 64-bit OS. "Machines with less RAM than this" should now be something like "Machines with less RAM than or equal to" since users with exactly 2 GB will receive 32-bit.
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Comment 4•7 years ago
|
||
Tracking this for 56 since we need a fix to support 64-bit users.
tracking-firefox56:
--- → +
tracking-firefox57:
--- → +
Comment 5•7 years ago
|
||
mozreview-review |
Comment on attachment 8897119 [details] Bug 1390253 - Increase RAM threshold for automatic 64-bit installation. https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/168408/#review173692
Attachment #8897119 -
Flags: review?(robert.strong.bugs) → review+
Pushed by mhowell@mozilla.com: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/fe4386054522 Increase RAM threshold for automatic 64-bit installation. r=rstrong
Comment 7•7 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/fe4386054522
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 57
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•7 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8897119 [details] Bug 1390253 - Increase RAM threshold for automatic 64-bit installation. Approval Request Comment [Feature/Bug causing the regression]: N/A [User impact if declined]: Suboptimal performance caused by deploying 64-bit builds to machines that we now understand are not well-suited to them. [Is this code covered by automated tests?]: No [Has the fix been verified in Nightly?]: I've manually spot checked that the RAM threshold still functions. [Needs manual test from QE? If yes, steps to reproduce]: No, the memory threshold feature has already been verified (bug 1366860), this just changes where the threshold is at. [List of other uplifts needed for the feature/fix]: None [Is the change risky?]: No [Why is the change risky/not risky?]: Simple change to the threshold value and equality check, no new logic or functionality. [String changes made/needed]: None
Attachment #8897119 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Comment 9•7 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8897119 [details] Bug 1390253 - Increase RAM threshold for automatic 64-bit installation. Increase memory requirement for 64-bit installation. Beta56+. Should be in 56.0b4.
Attachment #8897119 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta? → approval-mozilla-beta+
Comment 10•7 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/2f22606fa551
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•